Headlines

Judith Grossman

A feminist mom, aghast at how her son was treated

My son was given written notice of the charges against him, in the form of a letter from the campus Title IX officer. But instead of affording him the right to be fully informed, the separately listed allegations were a barrage of vague statements, rendering any defense virtually impossible. The letter lacked even the most basic information about the acts alleged to have happened years before. Nor were the allegations supported by any evidence other than the word of the ex-girlfriend.

The hearing itself was a two-hour ordeal of unabated grilling by the school’s committee, during which, my son later reported, he was expressly denied his request to be represented by counsel or even to have an attorney outside the door of the room. The questioning, he said, ran far afield even from the vaguely stated allegations contained in the so-called notice. Questions from the distant past, even about unrelated matters, were flung at him with no opportunity for him to give thoughtful answers.

The many pages of written documentation that my son had put together—which were directly on point about his relationship with his accuser during the time period of his alleged wrongful conduct—were dismissed as somehow not relevant. What was relevant, however, according to the committee, was the unsworn testimony of “witnesses” deemed to have observable knowledge about the long-ago relationship between my son and his accuser.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Who knew that American college students are required to surrender the Bill of Rights at the campus gates?

Well, most conservatives have known for decades.
Anyone that ever fell afoul of a campus “honor committee” (charged with investigating academic misdeeds back in the day).
The Duke Lacrosse team.
Pretty much any man who gets a woman mad at him.You just never had to deal with it before.

Something similar to what happened to her son happened to me when I was a freshman in 1989 at Villanova on a ROTC scholarship. I was kicked out of school and lost my scholarship. I can sympathize with her son but if this hadn’t become personal for her, she would have never had her epiphany and many more falsely accused young men would suffer.

It’s false charges that are the problem. Men are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Charlemagne on April 17, 2013 at 10:53 PM

This.

Especially in any issue pertaining to child custody: are you a man who dares recognise that if your spouse no longer wants to be married to you, via that get out of jail free card called “irreconcilable differences”, your infant child would be better off living with her mother because you cannot in good faith and conscience declare her mother “unfit” before the courts?

Guess what? Be prepared to pull out your wallet, again and again, because that is the only choice you will be given. Period. And God help you if for some reason one day in the future there is not enough there in your wallet to give…

For all those mocking her it’s not too dis-similar from how young liberals “grow up,” get jobs, start paying taxes, and have families and become conservative. When faced with the consequences of your idealistic ideology you often change and grow.

This woman just happened to have a starker example slapped in her face. At least she is recognizing the problem – as opposed to some who are so blind that they still have it totally fly over their head.

When did overzealous prosecution of rape become a feminist charge…..are you all saying that conservatives are pro…rape. What?

libfreeordie on April 17, 2013 at 10:49 PM

You guys own that one… we conservatives will be over here shamed that we’ve let you take the moral high ground in deciding people are guilty without evidence required and while denying the accused either the right to counsel or the right to defend themselves.

I’m so disappointed in my fellow Conservatives not willing to strip all accused of all rights and decide them guilty with nothing but a kangaroo-court trial; but you’re right… you liberals have that sewn up.

Maybe if you really want to show your moral high ground difference; you’ll get even MORE overzealous. Execute all those accused of the crime without bothering with the trial.

Yes. Once upon a time, if a woman made claims against a man, she actually had to prove it before the man was judged to be guilty. But not anymore.

The college situation our poor feminist mom recoils from is just the logical endpoint of her espoused philosophy regarding anything having to do with women accusing something being done to them by a man: Guilty.

Hate to tell you, darlin’, but what you have experienced is really nothing more than Islam in reverse – opposite to Islam, the endpoint of feminism is that if a man claims something having been done to him by a woman, he is shunned and must prove it – but if a woman claims something having been done to her by a man, the accusation is accepted on nothing more than her own word.

But that was before my son, a senior at a small liberal-arts college in New England, was charged—by an ex-girlfriend—with alleged acts of “nonconsensual sex” that supposedly occurred during the course of their relationship a few years earlier.

Ah, New England! You’re nuts to send your kid to college in New England with all of those Puritans running around looking for witches the politically incorrect.

Meh, I don’t feel bad for the lefty mom or her beta male son who grossed out his “girlfriend” to the point she had to destroy him. Welcome to the world you voted in, lady.

Maybe if you really want to show your moral high ground difference; you’ll get even MORE overzealous. Execute all those accused of the crime without bothering with the trial.

We all know the outcome anyhow; why bother with the trial?

gekkobear on April 17, 2013 at 11:16 PM

I’ve said for years now that leftists are nothing more than secular Puritans: if you run afoul of their ideal, you will be judged, and harshly. Their notion of justice is as arbitrary as anything dispensed by an imam; if you cross paths with them, they will not leave you alone and will cease bothering you only when they have ruined you utterly. Then they will brag about how they overcame your evil thoughts and ways again and again.

To libfreeordie: I hope that one day you have a son who is falsely accused of rape, or forced to go broke because his wife left him for no good reason, took his children, and he finds himself on the receiving end of vengeful courts whose notion of child support has absolutely nothing to do with the child’s needs. Perhaps then you might understand what “overzealous prosecution” does to people.

I’ve said for years now that leftists are nothing more than secular Puritans: if you run afoul of their ideal, you will be judged, and harshly. Their notion of justice is as arbitrary as anything dispensed by an imam; if you cross paths with them, they will not leave you alone and will cease bothering you only when they have ruined you utterly. Then they will brag about how they overcame your evil thoughts and ways again and again.

Wanderlust on April 17, 2013 at 11:28 PM

They’re total Puritans. They switched out the church for the university and have turned Harvard into their cathedral.

I still remember college age women marching through the streets of my campus when I went to university. This was around 2000. They screamed at the top of their lungs “the patriarchy must go! Hey hey! Ho ho!”… over and over again.

We had to think at the time, what was anyone doing to these girls? Nothing. Their whole push was an echo of some 1960′s women’s lib movement that they wanted to be a part of after it ended. Much as I might put on a pirate hat and say “YARRR!” at people. Some people don’t seem to grasp that it’s not meaningful anymore.

I’m not saying women’s lib never had meaning. It clearly did. But today? Ladies, you’ve got everything men have and more. Equality of rights does not mean equality of outcome. Men try hard and play hard. But what you’re doing to us makes us want to just give up, drink beer, and opt out. And then everyone loses. No one likes being treated unfairly. Consider that.

Here’s a thought… maybe her son wasn’t actually innocent. We’re talking about a lawyer mommy here. Of course she believes her son’s story. This is an even more heinous situation – when these women make excuses for the men in their lives and their politicians (Bill Clinton).

This broad will be torn apart by her own feminister ilk, for betraying the sisterhood by siding with her own vile dispicable rapist son. She will be shouted down and accused of never having been a feminist in the first place by all her old ideologue pals.

All the usefulness is gone from the useful idiot. She can spend the rest of her days wallowing in regret for spending decades siding with the very same people that ruined her son’s life, who’ll now be known as a sex offender forevermore.

On the other hand, at least she has SOME regard for that evil, violent XY monster she brought forth into this world. That’s more than you can say for a lot of feminists. A lot of them would happily throw their own sons under the bus for the cause, not just that, but they’d be proud of having done so.

Here’s a thought… maybe her son wasn’t actually innocent. We’re talking about a lawyer mommy here. Of course she believes her son’s story. This is an even more heinous situation – when these women make excuses for the men in their lives and their politicians (Bill Clinton).

herrevery on April 18, 2013 at 12:36 AM

Doesn’t matter. All that matters is, the guy was accused of a crime that is considered to be a felony in most (if not all) jurisdictions, and he was neither tried in a court of law nor was he provided anything resembling due process or presumption of innocence.

Why colleges and universities are allowed to adjudicate criminal cases internally instead of referring them to a court of law to begin with is utterly beyond me.

But that was before my son, a senior at a small liberal-arts college in New England, was charged—by an ex-girlfriend—with alleged acts of “nonconsensual sex” that supposedly occurred during the course of their relationship a few years earlier.

Only when it hits home does she come out of her politically correct fantasy. It’s so different when it is your own son rather than some random white male you don’t know isn’t it lady? You are the very definition of a hypocrite.

I know when kids bully other kids, and the parents get a call from the school or the victim’s kid about it, they almost never want to believe their sweet little angel could ever misbehave.

TigerPaw on April 18, 2013 at 1:12 AM

Whether he was guilty or not, he should have been entitled to due process under law, in a case tried by the local city court system – instead of being subjected to the summary judgment and kangaroo-court crap that he had to deal with at the college. As a US citizen, his presumption of innocence, right to counsel, right to face his accusers and cross-examine them, and his right that the prosecution make its case “beyond a reasonable doubt” using sworn testimony – all before being found guilty by a group of his peers – was taken away from him in that tribunal.

Forget gun-free zones, colleges and universities have become Constitution-free zones.

According to feminism, sex is nothing more than some power or status game and the criminal justice system is the means to turn the tables. No wonder so many homosexuals are openly unashamed of their homosexuality.

Have any of you read anything written by Catherine MacKinnon, the feminist who has been called the mother of sexual harassment? She writes about men like Hitler wrote about Jews or like the KKK writes about blacks. And yet this woman is held as a model of academia.

When did overzealous prosecution of rape become a feminist charge…..are you all saying that conservatives are pro…rape. What?

libfreeordie on April 17, 2013 at 10:49 PM

Ah, the old “all or nothing/false dilemma” fallacy any Logic 101 student would recognize.

No, conservatives are just pro-presumption of innocence, pro-right to counsel, pro-right to know charges against one, pro-right to present evidence, even pro-right to question witnesses. In the case of very young minors, the cross-examination can be tricky, but this was presumably a woman over 18 accusing him.

The bigger tragedy is that lying chicks like this one, as well as Tawana Brawley and Crystal Gale Mangum, make it all the more difficult for the prosecution of credible rape cases.

One could almost see a future male student at this New England liberal arts college defending himself by saying he was being railroaded like Grossman was, regardless of his guilt.

I’m not saying women’s lib never had meaning. It clearly did. But today? Ladies, you’ve got everything men have and more. Equality of rights does not mean equality of outcome. Men try hard and play hard. But what you’re doing to us makes us want to just give up, drink beer, and opt out. And then everyone loses. No one likes being treated unfairly. Consider that.

Karmashock on April 17, 2013 at 11:35 PM

Yes. Some men are responding by becoming MGTOW and not bothering with permanent relationships anymore.

When did overzealous prosecution of rape become a feminist charge…..are you all saying that conservatives are pro…rape. What?

libfreeordie on April 17, 2013 at 10:49 PM

Actually it’s the libs that must be pro-rape. They say that the only way to be pro-choice is to allow the choice of abortion. Which, logic dictates, means taht they don’t believe there is any “choice” prior to the pregancy. This must include the actual sex act. So that means that they are pro-rape since having sex to them is not a “choice”.